Himangshu Swin vs Shyamali Sircar (Nee Ganguly)
2026 Latest Caselaw 449 Cal/2

Calcutta High Court

Himangshu Swin vs Shyamali Sircar (Nee Ganguly) on 3 February, 2026

Author: Debangsu Basak

Bench: Debangsu Basak

OD-10
                                 APOT/171/2025

                      IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                          Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
                                 Original Side


                                          In the goods of:

                                          ASHIM KUMAR SIRCAR (DECEASED)
                                              -AND-
                                          HIMANGSHU SWIN
                                             -VERSUS-
                                          SHYAMALI SIRCAR (NEE GANGULY)
BEFORE :
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK
             And
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI
Date : 3rd February, 2026.
                                                                              Appearance:
                                                             Mr. Tapan Coomar Dey, Adv.
                                                              Ms. Shreya Chatterjee, Adv.
                                                                      ...for the appellant.

                                                         Ms. Shyamali Sircar (in person)
                                                                  ...for the respondent.

The Court :- Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated

May 19, 2025 passed in IA No.GA/8/2023 in PLA/183/2009.

By the impugned judgment and order, learned Single Judge

dismissed the application for discharge of caveat.

Caveatrix claims herself to be the married wife of the deceased.

In the event, the caveatrix is in a position to sustain such claim, no

doubt, she possesses caveatable interest in the estate of the deceased.

On the basis of affidavit evidence, such issue as to whether or not

there is caveatable interest of the caveatrix, in the estate of the deceased, in the

facts and circumstances of the present case, need not be entered into.

Learned Single Judge rightly, therefore, did not enter into such issue

on the basis of affidavit evidence by way of an application.

We find no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and

order.

Accordingly, APOT/171/2025 is dismissed without any order as to

costs.

(DEBANGSU BASAK, J.)

(MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI, J.) A/s.